Author Topic: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.  (Read 4628 times)

Offline rp2813

  • **
  • Posts: 853
  • 10/50
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #15 on: September 29, 2014, 01:04:16 AM »
Nice find, and I agree that though the dates may not match, the components are almost certainly those assembled originally by WECo.

Could the "40" in the handset mean April of 1950?  I see no reason to think the handset isn't the one the phone was issued with originally. 

More pix of all dated parts, please!!!

Ralph

Offline Kenton K

  • **
  • Posts: 918
  • Kenton "Clickty Clack"
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #16 on: September 29, 2014, 09:50:57 AM »
Ok, here are the photos😄
I did small amount of polish, not to much though. I don't mind a slightly worn phone. The handset is amazing though, it has kept most of its Bakelite shine. No peeling, bumpiness, and little orange peel.

One question though, is the dial card appropriate?

Offline Kenton K

  • **
  • Posts: 918
  • Kenton "Clickty Clack"
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #17 on: September 29, 2014, 09:54:14 AM »
Here are more pics

Offline Kenton K

  • **
  • Posts: 918
  • Kenton "Clickty Clack"
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #18 on: September 29, 2014, 09:57:35 AM »
Even more📞!

Offline Kenton K

  • **
  • Posts: 918
  • Kenton "Clickty Clack"
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #19 on: September 29, 2014, 10:06:18 AM »
Handset elements,

Offline Kenton K

  • **
  • Posts: 918
  • Kenton "Clickty Clack"
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #20 on: September 29, 2014, 10:07:59 AM »
Handset marking,

Offline Kenton K

  • **
  • Posts: 918
  • Kenton "Clickty Clack"
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2014, 10:09:24 AM »
And everything out together! I love the translucent bezel, really nice effect.

Offline Dennis Markham

  • VintageRotaryPhones.com
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5621
    • VintageRotaryPhones.com
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2014, 11:01:53 AM »
Ken, that is a real nice early 500!  I like the '49 network date.  Is the receiver element also marked '49?  Nice job picking that one out of the crowd.  The price was right too.  Congratulations!

~Dennis

Online Phonesrfun

  • **
  • Posts: 4868
  • "Number Please"
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2014, 11:58:58 AM »
Congratulations, Ken.
 
As for the number card, there were LL N-NNNN exchanges in larger cities in 1950, so the dial card could very well be authentic.  Notice that it does not have an area code on it, so it is at least authentic back to the mid 60's.  If the phone once had another shorter number, an installer would have likely been the one to go out to the residence and change the number card to the present one.  Sometimes when they did that, they'd leave the old one behind.
 
 
-Bill G

Offline Kenton K

  • **
  • Posts: 918
  • Kenton "Clickty Clack"
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2014, 01:18:23 PM »
Dennis,

The receiver is  a bit hard to read, but it defiantly reads 10-5-50. The receiver was the first date I checked and I thought read it as 10-5-60 and was super bummed out, thinking other parts had also been replaced. The ink must have been running out when they stamped it.

Ken

Offline rp2813

  • **
  • Posts: 853
  • 10/50
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #25 on: September 29, 2014, 02:49:56 PM »
I'm definitely not an expert on telephone set assembly, but it looks to me like the wiring on your set is properly "dressed" from the factory.  I don't think there's any reason to think your phone isn't 100% original.

On my 10/50 set, only the equalizer and transmitter element aren't dated 10/50, and the case is from 1956.  The equalizer is from September and the transmitter was much later.  It also had a 1960 coiled cord on it when I found it.  I've since replaced that with a straight cord, although it's a 1954.  I found a 1953 transmitter to use in it, but for now I have the phone boxed up and am instead using my matching dates 9/51 500T.  It as a reverse painted bezel, so provides the same look on my desk as my 1950.  I agree that the reverse painted bezels give an interesting 3D-like effect.  When I found my 1950 and saw the different looking bezel, my first thought was that the characters might be luminous because they had a faintly greenish tint to them.

It's interesting that to me, your bezel appears to be the injected type in all of the pictures you've posted, although the yellowed characters should have been an indication -- but then again, I have early '50s injected bezels that have yellowed characters.  When my 500T showed up on ebay, I spotted the reverse painted bezel right away.  Probably the zoom option had something to do with it.

If you decide to use this phone, I'd be interested in knowing how well the original transmitter performs.  So far I'm not getting any complaints about my '51, but in my experience the T1 types don't seem to have the same longevity as their F1 predecessors, even after a good rapping on a hard surface.

Also, the number card seems appropriate for the phone.  I have the same type, the original that was issued for the 302 my parents had installed in their house in 1960, before direct dial long distance came to the greater Bay Area.  Although Area Codes (the telco term is "Number Planning Areas") were developed as part of the North American Dialing Plan in 1947, it wasn't until 1963 or 1964 that this area got direct dial LD and new sticky-backed 10-digit number cards were sent out for subscribers to place over their old alpha-numeric 7-character cards.  I think a lot of people just stuck them to the celluloid protector, but not my dad.  After about 45 years, the glue had lost its properties and I was able to peel the overlay off to reveal the original alpha-numeric card, no worse for wear, which I'm now using.

It makes perfect sense to me that this same type of card could have been used on phones issued in 1950.  It would be interesting to know where your phone was originally deployed.  I don't think there's a database anywhere on line that matches exchange names to the various switching offices where they were used across the Bell System network.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2014, 03:06:27 PM by rp2813 »
Ralph

Offline poplar1

  • ***
  • Posts: 6305
  • 1051-AL
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #26 on: September 29, 2014, 03:29:03 PM »
Was 10/50 the first month that "operator" was not in a semi-circle below the zero?

The solid gray number cards (Form E-4203 and E-4204) are mentioned in a December, 1953 BSP, but I haven't found any reference earlier than that.

http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=12632.msg133071#msg133071


« Last Edit: September 29, 2014, 03:30:42 PM by poplar1 »
"C'est pas une restauration, c'est une rénovation."--François Martin.

Offline Brinybay

  • **
  • Posts: 4430
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #27 on: September 29, 2014, 04:02:19 PM »
Congratulations, Ken.
 
As for the number card, there were LL N-NNNN exchanges in larger cities in 1950, so the dial card could very well be authentic.  Notice that it does not have an area code on it, so it is at least authentic back to the mid 60's.  If the phone once had another shorter number, an installer would have likely been the one to go out to the residence and change the number card to the present one.  Sometimes when they did that, they'd leave the old one behind.


Yes, look underneath the dial card.  I found an original underneath a newer dial card on a pink 500 I had.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2014, 04:07:02 PM by Brinybay »
The idea that a four-year degree is the only path to worthwhile knowledge is insane.
 - Mike Row
e

Offline tallguy58

  • **
  • Posts: 898
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #28 on: September 29, 2014, 04:12:05 PM »
I've never come across a 311A equalizer.

Were they eventually incorporated into the networks?

All of my 500's don't have one.
Cheers........Bill

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: 1950??? I'm crossing my fingers.
« Reply #29 on: September 29, 2014, 05:08:05 PM »
I've never come across a 311A equalizer.

Were they eventually incorporated into the networks?

All of my 500's don't have one.

The 311 equalizer was only used with the original 500 sets that had a 425A network.  The 425B network used semiconductor varistors, which are voltage-sensitive resistors, instead of the thermistor and incorporated everything into the network can.

This upgrade happened in 1951 and was the reason for the model number change from 500A/B to 500C/D.
Only the 500J/K/T used the 425A and equalizer some time longer.

[that's right, no equalizer in the 500J/K/T]
« Last Edit: September 29, 2014, 05:21:12 PM by unbeldi »